This past Friday and Saturday, I participated as an elder in the People’s Tribunal on Canadian Responsibility for the genocide in Gaza to hear witnesses’ evidence and presentations by legal experts. The two-day event was expertly organized by Ms Azeeza Kanji, who, despite an unjustifiably many obstacles, was able to keep the process unfolding as it should at the Senate instead of the University of Ottawa, which cancelled pitifully, at the last minute, its hosting of the Tribunal.

The witnesses’ testimonies were compelling, genuine, heart-wrenching and from Gaza.  The expert presentations were informative, professional and profound. The event was timely and brought together a formidable group led by Professor Richard Falk, an internationally renowned legal scholar and staunch advocate of the human rights of the marginalized and oppressed.

Dr Falk and his wife, Dr Hilal, were stopped and questioned for four hours at Pearson airport by the CBSA, under the pretext that he may pose a threat to Canadian National Security. Dr Falk is 95 years old, and the gruesome questioning was held on his birthday as his colleagues at the Tribunal in Ottawa were hoping to celebrate his birthday with him. This obscene treatment did not faze Dr Falk, but it shook all of us to see condemned US tactics migrate to Canada. Those responsible for this trespass should be held accountable for blemishing the Canadian reputation.

I made a few remarks at the Tribunal that I list below. First, the witnesses were credible, and their stories brought many of those listening to tears. They voiced their frustrations about what they were going through while the world was oblivious to their suffering. I begged to differ in my assessment of the outside world’s response. Yes, indeed, complicit governments, particularly in the West, corporate media and spineless universities turned a blind eye to the genocide, but the people of the world condemned what “Israel” was waging in Gaza and the region. Millions in Sydney, Australia, Spain, Ireland, the UK, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Slovenia, Belgium, Canada, Bangladesh, Turkey, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Colombia, Chile, China, and many other countries protested almost daily against the atrocities of the Israeli army and its collaborators.

A few of the speakers pointed out the geopolitical framework that permitted these atrocities and highlighted the settler colonial logic that condones these crimes against humanity. I thought that a further elaboration of the Israeli objectives behind the ethnic cleansing and the genocide is needed.  I have argued in several interviews and statements to the press that this genocide is also about gas, oil, the Ben Gurion Canal alternative to the Suez Canal, subverting the Chinese Silk Road, marketing surveillance technologies, and battle-tested Israeli weapons.   I cannot think of a colonial episode that did not seek economic advantage from its colonies; the Gaza colonization is no exception. 

“Israel” is trying to project itself as a secure alternative source of gas and even oil for Europe to replace Russia. Emptying Gaza will give “Israel” uncontested control of the new gas finds in the territorial waters of Gaza of the Levant Basin, which is based on 122 trillion cu ft of gas and 17 billion barrels of oil. Although many countries in the Levant Basin have legitimate claims to these resources, “Israel” is the only country extracting these resources from the Basin.

“Israel” has been touting its project to add a new Canal that ties the Pacific Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea. The new Canal, known as the Ben Gurion Canal, is advanced as a more efficient alternative to the Suez Canal. It is touted to be wider, deeper and allows two-way traffic. Furthermore, it goes through and is very near to Gaza; it would not need to be dredged that often, as that routing will be in rock-based terrain instead of the sandy Suez Canal that needs almost bi-weekly dredging.

Both of these projects would benefit immensely from emptying Gaza. Add to this the new transportation route from India to Europe through “Israel” as an alternative to China’s Silk Road. This alternative route is being peddled by the Trump Administration as a pressure tactic to constrain China’s Silk Road, which confers on China many geopolitical and economic advantages.  

 I do not need to dwell on the many lucrative exports of the Israeli Weapons and Surveillance Industries and the leverage this has given “Israel” over many repressive and belligerent regimes. The Gaza war is used by “Israel” to peddle its weapons and systems as battle-tested. The Palestinian civilians are used as Guinea pigs.

Economics provides another dimension to Israel’s legendary impunity. “Israel” has not paid a penny for the theft of Palestine in 1948 and the theft of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights in 1967. In 1988, the late Sami Hadawi and I estimated that the value of assets and incomes lost to “Israel” amounted in 1980 to $300 billion (Palestinian Rights & Losses in 1948, Saqi Press). Today, these losses are worth almost a trillion dollars when an annual inflation rate and a modest annual rate of return are added. This is not counting the losses in 1967 and not taking into account the massive destruction Israeli rampages in the region have exacted on the people of the region.

The fact that “Israel” has not paid a penny for these thefts and destructions is itself a crucial factor for its impunity. If it were possible to force “Israel”, as the international laws would have required, to pay reparations and compensation to the injured parties, for all their losses and destruction “Israel” has caused, it may have restrained “Israel” from the continuation of its wanton behaviour.

One further note to make is that, yes, the UN is absent or held back from playing its necessary role in restraining “Israel” and the US from sustaining the genocide. But the issue here is not the marginalization of the UN; what is needed is rehabilitating the UN by democratising it. The Veto power exercised by the permanent members of the UN Security Council should not apply to the issue of peace and security. Better yet, a majority of the population of the world should be able to reverse the veto and make it inapplicable.